Orrin Hatch: “of course the underlying amendment of the Senator from Connecticut threatens the very purpose of the balanced budget…”

“of course the underlying amendment of the Senator from Connecticut threatens the very purpose of the balanced budget amendment. Even if he does make this small change of adding language that makes the resolution became law, this certainly would improve his amendment. That is a small matter. The reason he would have to do that, if his intention is that the resolution be passed by both bodies and signed by the President, is because he has deleted specifically our requirement that any resolution become law, meaning it passes both Houses and it is signed by the President. So there is no other way the court would construe it other than the way I have suggested it. But that is a small matter because Senator Dodd's new amendment, assuming that he modifies his current amendment, clarifies his intent in one regard. He would make it clear that a joint resolution must become law. That would be an improvement. But my other criticisms remain. There would be too many instances in which Senate Joint Resolution 1's requirements could be waived. Today, any action by a foreign nation can pose an imminent and serious military threat to our Nation. Under Senator Dodd's amendment, any such action would allow Congress to engage in increased social spending, and waive this balanced budget amendment. To me that is ridiculous. It isn't a protection. It is just another way to continue business as usual. I frankly am not for that, and I do not think most others will be either.”